Existing law relating to housing development approval requires a local agency to compile a list of information needed to approve or deny a postentitlement phase permit, to post an example of a complete, approved application and an example of a complete set of postentitlement phase permits for at least 5 types of housing development projects in the jurisdiction, as specified, and to make those items available to all applicants for these permits no later than January 1, 2024. Existing law establishes time limits for completing reviews regarding whether an application for a postentitlement phase permit is complete and compliant and consequences for a local agency that fails to meet that timeline, as provided. Existing law defines "postentitlement phase permit" to, among other things, include a range of permits issued by a local agency. This bill would require a state agency to comply with the above-described provisions relating to postentitlement phase permits applicable to a local agency. The bill would require a state agency to make the information list, as described above, and the above-described examples of a complete, approved application and a complete set of postentitlement phase permits available on the agency's internet website by January 1, 2026. The bill would deem a postentitlement phase permit approved, and all related reviews complete, if a state agency fails to meet the time limits for review of an application for that permit. The bill would revise the definition of "postentitlement phase permit" for purposes of these provisions to, among other things, include permits issued by a state agency and any postentitlement review by a state agency that is necessary to begin construction of a development that is intended to be at least 23 residential, excluding certain discretionary and ministerial permits and reviews and subject to specified exceptions, and would define the term "state agency" for these purposes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law governs the obligations of tenants and landlords. Existing law authorizes a tenant to deduct the payment made to a public utility or publicly owned utility or a district from the rent, as specified. Existing law prohibits a lessor who has retaliated against a lessee for exercising the lessee's prescribed rights from recovering possession of a dwelling, causing the lessee to quit involuntarily, increasing the rent, or decreasing services within 180 days of the occurrence of specified events relating to tenability, if the lessee is not in default on their rent, as specified. Existing law presumes that the hiring of real property is renewed for a specified amount of time, under specified circumstances. For any residential tenancy commenced, renewed, or continuing on a month-to-month or other periodic basis, on or after January 1, 2026, this bill would require a landlord or their agent to allow the tenant to opt out of paying for any subscription from a third-party internet service provider for specified services in connection with the tenancy. If the landlord or their agent violates this provision, the bill would authorize the tenant to deduct the cost of the subscription from the rent. The bill would prohibit a landlord or their agent from retaliating against a tenant for exercising their rights pursuant to this bill and consistent with the above-described provision on retaliation, as provided.
Existing law provides for the creation by local ordinance, or by ministerial approval if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, of accessory dwelling units in areas zoned for single-family or multifamily dwelling residential use in accordance with specified standards and conditions. Existing law prohibits a local agency from issuing a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit before the local agency issues a certificate of occupancy for the primary dwelling. This bill, notwithstanding that prohibition, would require a local agency to issue a certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit constructed in a county that is subject to a proclamation of a state of emergency made by the Governor on or after February 1, 2025, even if the primary dwelling has not yet been issued a certificate of occupancy, if certain requirements are met, including that the primary dwelling was substantially damaged or destroyed by an event referenced in the state of emergency proclamation. By imposing new duties on local agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires a permitting agency to either approve or deny an application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit within 60 days from the date the permitting agency receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. Existing law deems the application approved if the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days. Under existing law, if the permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create or serve a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, the permitting agency may delay approving or denying the permit application for the accessory dwelling unit until the permitting agency approves or denies the permit application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, as provided. The California Coastal Act of 1976, which is administered by the California Coastal Commission, requires any person wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone, as defined, to obtain a coastal development permit from a local government or the commission, except as provided. Existing law specifies that the laws governing accessory dwelling units do not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the act, except as specified. This bill would create an exception to the above provision by requiring a local government or the commission, as specified, to either approve or deny a coastal development permit application for an accessory dwelling unit within 60 days of receiving a completed application. The bill would, notwithstanding that 60-day time limit, authorize the commission, if a coastal development permit application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a coastal development permit application to create or serve a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, to delay approving or denying the coastal development permit application for the accessory dwelling unit until the commission approves or denies the coastal development permit application to create or serve the new single-family or multifamily dwelling. Under the bill, and except under the circumstance described above, if the commission has not approved or denied a completed application within 60 days, the application would be deemed approved. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for its physical development, and the development of certain lands outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. That law allows a development proponent to submit an application for a development that is subject to a specified streamlined, ministerial approval process not subject to a conditional use permit, if the development satisfies certain objective planning standards, including that the development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units. This bill would deem an adaptive reuse project a use by right in all zones, regardless of the zoning of the site, and subject to a streamlined, ministerial review process if the project meets specified requirements, subject to specified exceptions. In this regard, an adaptive reuse project, in order to qualify for the streamlined, ministerial review process, would be required to be proposed for an existing building or structure that is less than 50 years old or meets certain requirements regarding the preservation of historic resources, including the signing of an affidavit declaring that the project will comply with the United States Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation for, among other things, the preservation of exterior facades of a building or structure that face a street, or receive federal or state historic rehabilitation tax credits, as specified. The bill would require an adaptive reuse project to meet specified affordability criteria. In this regard, the bill would require an adaptive reuse project for rental housing to include either 8% of the unit for very low income households and 5% of the units for extremely low income households or 15% of the units for lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project for owner-occupied housing, the bill would require the development to offer either 30% of the units at an affordable housing cost to moderate-income households or 15% of the units at an affordable housing cost to lower income households. For an adaptive reuse project including mixed uses, the bill would require at least one-half of the square footage of the adaptive reuse project to be dedicated to residential uses. The bill would prohibit an adaptive reuse project from being permitted in industrial zones that do not permit residential uses. The bill would provide, among other things relating to projects involving adaptive reuse, that parking is not required for the portion of a project consisting of a building subject to adaptive reuse that does not have existing onsite parking. The bill would authorize an adaptive reuse project subject to these provisions to include the development of new residential or mixed-use structures on undeveloped areas and parking areas located on the same parcel as the proposed repurposed building, or on the parcels adjacent to the proposed adaptive reuse project site if certain conditions are met. The bill would subject an adaptive reuse project approved by a local government pursuant to these provisions to specified labor standards, including certain labor prevailing wage, apprenticeship, skilled and training workforce, and health care expenditure requirements, and would require development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury. By requiring certain development proponents of an adaptive reuse project to sign an affidavit regarding the preservation of historic resources and requiring development proponents to certify compliance with certain labor standards under penalty of perjury, the bill would expand the crime of perjury and therefore impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would authorize a local government to adopt an ordinance, as specified, to, among other things, specify the process and requirements applicable to adaptive reuse projects, as specified, and would require an adaptive reuse project to comply with all objective planning standards found in the ordinance. The bill would specify that nothing in its provisions relating to adaptive reuse projects is intended to preempt the adoption and implementation of a local ordinance that provides alternative procedures and substantive requirements for adaptive reuse projects, provided that the local ordinance does not prohibit an applicant from electing to pursue an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would require a local agency that has not adopted an above-described ordinance to ministerially without discretionary review approve or disapprove applications for a permit to create or serve an adaptive reuse project, as specified. The bill would, if a local government's planning director or equivalent position determines that the adaptive reuse project submitted pursuant to these provisions is consistent with the objective planning standards, require the local government to approve the adaptive reuse project within specified timeframes. The bill would require the local government staff or relevant local planning and permitting department, upon determining that the adaptive reuse project is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards, to provide the proponent written documentation of, among other things, which standard or standards the development conflicts with within specific timeframes. The bill would prohibit a local government from imposing any local development standard on any project that is an adaptive reuse that would require alteration of the existing building envelope, except as specified, whether or not the local government has adopted an ordinance. By requiring local governments to implement the streamlined, ministerial review process for adaptive reuse projects, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would, except as specified, exempt an adaptive reuse project from all impact fees that are not reasonably related to the impacts resulting from the change of use of the site from nonresidential to residential or mixed use and would require any fees charged to be roughly proportional to the difference in impacts caused by the change of use. This bill would authorize a city or county, or city and county, commencing in the 2026–27 fiscal year, to establish an adaptive reuse investment incentive program to pay adaptive reuse investment incentive funds to the proponent of an adaptive reuse project approved pursuant to the streamlined, ministerial process described above for up to 30 consecutive fiscal years, as specified. The bill would define "adaptive reuse investment incentive funds" to mean an amount up to or equal to the amount of ad valorem property tax revenue allocated to the participating local agency from the taxation of that portion of the total assessed value of the real and personal property of an adaptive reuse project property that is in excess of the qualified adaptive reuse project property's valuation at the time of the proponent's initial request for funding. The bill would define various other terms for these purposes, and would make findings and declarations related to its provisions. The bill would make its provisions operative on July 1, 2026. (2) Existing law, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) , requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill, by establishing the streamlined, ministerial review process described above, would exempt the approval of adaptive reuse projects subject to those processes from CEQA. The bill would also exempt specified findings regarding industrial uses and ordinances adopted to implement specified provisions from CEQA. (3) Existing law requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development to notify a city, county, or city and county, and authorizes the department to notify the Attorney General, that a city, county, or city and county is in violation of state law if the department finds that the housing element or an amendment to that element, or any specified action or failure to act, does not substantially comply with the law as it pertains to housing elements or that any local government has taken an action in violation of certain housing laws. This bill would make corrections to a housing law cross-reference relating to the adaptive reuse project process established by the bill, thereby making a violation of that adaptive reuse project process by a city, county, or city and county subject to the above-described notification requirements. (4) The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65585 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Existing law, the Permit Streamlining Act, requires a public agency to determine whether an application for a development project is complete within specified time periods, as specified. The act requires a public agency that is the lead agency for a development project to approve or disapprove that project within specified time periods. Existing law, the California Emergency Services Act, among other things, authorizes the governing body of a city, county, or city and county to proclaim a local emergency under certain circumstances, as specified, and grants political subdivisions various powers and authorities in periods of local emergency. This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to approve or deny a complete application, within 10 business days of receipt of the application, for a building permit or an equivalent permit for any of the specified structures intended to be used by a person until the rebuilding or repair of an affected property is complete. By imposing new duties on local agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires the Governor to create an Interagency Council on Homelessness, consisting of specified members. Among other goals, existing law requires the council to serve as a facilitator and create partnerships among federal, state, and local governments, nonprofit entities working to end homelessness, homeless services providers, and the private sector, for the purpose of arriving at specific strategies to end homelessness. Existing law also requires the council to make policy and procedural recommendations to legislators and other governmental entities. This bill would require the council to coordinate with representatives from LGBTQ+ communities to identify recommended policies and best practices for providing inclusive and culturally competent services to LGBTQ+ people experiencing homelessness and develop recommendations to, among other things, expand data collection to understand the needs and experiences of LGBTQ+ people in state homelessness programs, as defined. The bill would require the council, on or before July 1, 2027, to submit a report to specific committees of the Legislature on these recommendations.
Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. The law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to determine whether the housing element is in substantial compliance with specified provisions of that law. Existing law requires HCD to designate jurisdictions as prohousing pursuant to emergency regulations adopted by HCD, as prescribed, and to report those designations to the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. Existing law specifies that these emergency regulations will remain in effect until HCD promulgates permanent prohousing regulations. This bill would instead require HCD to designate jurisdictions as prohousing pursuant to permanent regulations adopted by HCD to implement these provisions, as specified. Beginning with the 7th housing element cycle, upon request by a small rural jurisdiction, to the extent feasible, the bill would require HCD to evaluate materials from the small rural jurisdiction's housing element submission when determining whether the jurisdiction qualifies as prohousing, but only with respect to those small rural jurisdictions that have a compliant housing element. The bill would also prohibit HCD from requiring small rural jurisdictions to renew their prohousing designation for at least 4 years. The bill would define "small rural jurisdiction" for these purposes to mean either a city with a population of fewer than 25,000 persons or a county with a population of fewer than 200,000 persons. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65589.9 of the Government Code proposed by SB 262 to be operative only if this bill and SB 262 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
(1) Existing law, the Planning and Zoning Law, requires each county and city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the county or city, and specified land outside its boundaries. Existing law requires the general plan to include, among other mandatory elements, a housing element, and requires the housing element to include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development. Existing law requires, for the 4th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, the department to determine the existing and projected need for housing for each region, as specified. Existing law requires the department, in consultation with the council of governments, to determine the existing and projected need of housing for each region at least 2 years prior to the scheduled revision of the housing element, as provided. Existing law requires the department to meet and consult with the council of governments regarding the assumptions and methodology to be used to determine the region's housing needs at least 26 months prior to the scheduled revision of the housing element, as provided. This bill, except as specified, would extend the above-described timeline for the department to determine the existing and projected need of housing for each region from 2 years to 3 years prior to the scheduled revision of the housing element. The bill would require the department to meet and consult with the council of governments, as described above, pursuant to prescribed deadlines. For the 7th revision of the housing element, the bill would require the department to meet and consult with each council of governments at least 38 months prior to the scheduled revision, except for specified councils of governments. For the 8th and subsequent revisions of the housing element, the bill would require the department to meet and consult with each council of governments at least 38 months prior to the scheduled revision. (2) Existing law authorizes at least 2 or more cities and a county, or counties, at least 28 months prior to the scheduled housing element revision, to form a subregional entity to allocate the subregion's existing and projected housing need among its members. Existing law requires the council of governments to determine the share of regional housing need assigned to each delegate subregion at least 25 months prior to the scheduled revision. Existing law also requires the share allocated to the delegate subregion or subregions by a council of governments to be in a proportion consistent with the distribution of households assumed for the comparable time period of the applicable regional transportation plan. This bill would instead require the share allocated to the delegate subregion or subregions by a council of governments to be in a proportion consistent with the subregion's share of the current adopted final regional housing need allocation plan. (3) Existing law requires certain transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system. Existing law requires that each regional transportation plan include a sustainable communities strategy developed to achieve greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for the automobile and light truck sector for 2020 and 2035 established by the State Air Resources Board. Existing law requires each council of governments, or delegate subregion as applicable, to consider certain factors in developing the methodology that allocates regional housing needs, including each member jurisdiction's existing and projected jobs and housing relationship. This bill would require each council of governments, or delegate subregion as applicable, to consider, in addition to the above-described factors, the development pattern set forth in the region's sustainable communities strategy of its regional transportation plan. (4) Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that housing planning be coordinated and integrated with the regional transportation plan. To achieve this goal, existing law requires the allocation plan to allocate housing units within the region consistent with the development pattern included in the sustainable communities strategy. Existing law also requires the resolution approving the final housing need allocation plan to demonstrate that the plan is consistent with the sustainable communities strategy in the regional transportation plan, among other things. This bill would instead require the allocation plan to be informed by the development pattern included in the sustainable communities strategy. The bill would also require the resolution approving the final housing need allocation plan to demonstrate that the plan is, instead, informed by the sustainable communities strategy in the regional transportation plan, among other things. (5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.01 of the Government Code proposed by SB 486 to be operative only if this bill and SB 486 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.03 of the Government Code proposed by AB 650 to be operative only if this bill and AB 650 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65584.04 of the Government Code proposed by SB 486 and AB 650, to be operative only if this bill and either or both of those bills are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (6) By imposing additional requirements on a local entity, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law, the Mobilehome Residency Law, governs the terms and conditions of residency in mobilehome parks and prescribes the content of a rental agreement for a tenancy. Existing law requires that a copy of the Mobilehome Residency Law be provided as an exhibit and incorporated into the rental agreement by reference, as specified. Existing law also requires that a copy of a specified notice containing the rights and responsibilities of homeowners and park managers be included in the rental agreement and requires management to provide a copy of the notice to all homeowners each year, as specified. Existing law requires these and other notices required by the Mobilehome Residency Law to be either personally delivered to the homeowner or sent by mail, as specified, to the homeowner, unless otherwise provided. Existing law allows all notices required by the Mobilehome Residency Law to be delivered before February 1 of each year to be combined into one notice, as specified. This bill would, instead, require notices required by the Mobilehome Residency Law to be delivered to both the homeowner and resident of the mobilehome. The bill would also authorize the notices required by the Mobilehome Residency Law to be delivered prior to February 1 of each year to be delivered by electronic mail if the homeowner or resident has provided affirmative, written consent, as defined. The bill would allow a homeowner or resident to revoke their consent to receive notices by electronic mail at any time, without any fee, charge, or penalty, and without any impact to the terms of their tenancy, as specified. The bill would require management to deliver personally or by mail to the homeowner or resident a notice stating that the homeowner or resident has agreed to receive notices by electronic mail and may revoke this agreement, as provided. This bill would make nonsubstantive changes reflective of existing law, as provided.
Existing law regulates the terms and conditions of residential tenancies, including generally limiting the amount of security that a landlord may demand or receive to an amount or value equivalent to one month's rent, as provided, and allowing a landlord to claim of the security only those amounts as are reasonably necessary for specified purposes. Existing law defines a security for these purposes as any payment, fee, deposit, or charge, including any payment, fee, deposit, or charge, except as specified, that is imposed at a tenancy's beginning to reimburse a landlord for costs associated with processing a new tenant or that is imposed as an advance payment of rent, used for any purpose. Existing law requires a landlord to provide a tenant a copy of an itemized statement, as specified, and return the security's remaining portion to the tenant by personal delivery or by first-class mail, postage prepaid, no later than 21 calendar days after the tenant has vacated the premises, as specified. Existing law authorizes a landlord and tenant to mutually agree to have the landlord deposit electronically the security's remaining portion to a bank account or other financial institution designated by the tenant or provide a copy of the itemized statement to an email account provided by the tenant. This bill would revise these provisions to generally require the landlord to return the security by personal delivery or by check made payable to the tenant. If the landlord received the security or rental payments from the tenant electronically, the bill would instead require the landlord to return the remainder of the security electronically, as specified, unless the landlord and tenant designated another method of return, by written agreement. If the landlord received the security or rental payments from the tenant electronically, the bill would require the landlord to notify the tenant in writing of the tenant's right to receive the security electronically pursuant to these provisions, as specified. The bill would also instead authorize the landlord and tenant to mutually agree, as specified, to provide the itemized statement by either email to an email account provided by the tenant or mail by first-class mail, postage prepaid, to an address provided by the tenant. If multiple adult tenants reside in the unit, the bill would require the landlord to return the remainder of the security by a check made payable to all adult tenants, as specified, and provide the itemized statement by personal delivery or first-class mail, postage prepaid, to any one of the adult tenants chosen by the landlord, unless the landlord and all adult tenants, at the commencement of the tenancy or at any time during or after the tenancy, enter into a mutual written agreement containing specified provisions.
